Wikipedia:Cleanup/Archive 5
| This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Cleanup. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 10 |
- Listings from 2005
2005
September
- Margaret Mitchell One of the most prominent and famous American novelists. --ThomasK 16:02, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
- I can't find an online source, but the central unwikified section, Margaret Mitchell#Gone With the Wind, reeks of copyvio. Tearlach 00:47, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
- Patriarch Eutychius of Constantinople - the two sections need to be merged and modified into modern and more comprehensive English. 69.196.116.29 23:54, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
- Completely unresolved and unedited since posted. --Lendorien 21:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've done a fair bit of work on it, but there's still a lot to be done. It really requires more of an expert eye than I have since it's pretty specialized information. --edi 04:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Simulacrum - Starts with an old defintion, then says there's a new, more popular definition, then talks about a whole bunch of things unrelated to each other only separated by paragraphs (meaning it needs to be divided into subsections and preferably more ordered:). Kreachure 22:25, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
- This issue is still present. Little effort has been doen to fix it. --Lendorien 20:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Contributions of User:Kjrajesh - pretty much all this user's articles need to be cleaned up. - Mike Rosoft 20:09, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
- I've cleaned up quite a few of his articles but there seem to be hundreds of them! Woblosch 21:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Theistic realism - page is made for basically a neologism that is mostly set up by Phillip E. Johnson to explain a theistic way of understanding intelligent design or creation science. The context of this is not clear, nor is the work particulary of high quality. Joshuaschroeder 06:11, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
- Still needs work. Lacks sources. --Lendorien 20:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
- Direct-to-video - Poorly written, lack of info, badly designed and senseless.
- Still not pretty. Nswinton 21:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Nancy Astor, Viscountess Astor is in need of some reorganization. Various sections could probably be subcategorized (for example: 'Virginia', 'New York' and 'England' — although I'm not sure what heading they could fall under; also, 'Parliament' and 'The House doesn't miss anybody' should probably go together). jareha 05:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
- NPOV and unreferenced still. Nswinton 21:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Frame of reference - very long paragraphs, particularly in the lead.
- Fixed spelling of title (moved page). -- Igiffin 04:44, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Needs expert help. Nswinton 21:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Involution (philosophy) - possibly overenthusiastic capitalization.
- Besides possibly narrow worldview, this articles isn't in terribly bad shape. Nswinton 21:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
- Nursing Informatics - majority of article is a reprint of a memo from a company which lists opportunities in the field. This seems inappropriate material for Wikipedia. Also, external references not formatted standard way.--Vitamin D 19:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
- Right now (4/07)there is really only an opening definition and 6 more definitions in the definition section! Some good refs but no article. tagged for expand. --killing sparrows 06:40, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Margaret Mitchell One of the most prominent and famous American novelists. --ThomasK 16:02, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
- I can't find an online source, but the central unwikified section, Margaret Mitchell#Gone With the Wind, reeks of copyvio. Tearlach 00:47, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
- Patriarch Eutychius of Constantinople - the two sections need to be merged and modified into modern and more comprehensive English. 69.196.116.29 23:54, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
- Completely unresolved and unedited since posted. --Lendorien 21:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've done a fair bit of work on it, but there's still a lot to be done. It really requires more of an expert eye than I have since it's pretty specialized information. --edi 04:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
- Simulacrum - Starts with an old defintion, then says there's a new, more popular definition, then talks about a whole bunch of things unrelated to each other only separated by paragraphs (meaning it needs to be divided into subsections and preferably more ordered:). Kreachure 22:25, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
- This issue is still present. Little effort has been doen to fix it. --Lendorien 20:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
- Contributions of User:Kjrajesh - pretty much all this user's articles need to be cleaned up. - Mike Rosoft 20:09, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
- I've cleaned up quite a few of his articles but there seem to be hundreds of them! Woblosch 21:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Theistic realism - page is made for basically a neologism that is mostly set up by Phillip E. Johnson to explain a theistic way of understanding intelligent design or creation science. The context of this is not clear, nor is the work particulary of high quality. Joshuaschroeder 06:11, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
- Still needs work. Lacks sources. --Lendorien 20:06, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Content Disclaimer
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.
- The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
- There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
- It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
- Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
- Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.